BCCI attempts to find a new way to block DRS

The one area the BCCI has not been able to control is the vote of the game’s most important stakeholders — the players. Up until now, that is.

Playing conditions, proposed law changes and everything else to do with what happens on the field is debated by the ICC’s cricket committee, on which the players have two representatives. They are Sri Lanka’s Kumar Sangakkara and the president of the Federation of International Cricketers Associations, former Australia spinner Tim May.

Those men were elected by the players from around the world through the votes of their Test captains.

The BCCI recently put Laxman Sivaramakrishnan up as a candidate to stand against May. Nine Test caps and 16 one-day internationals suggest there is nothing wrong with the man’s credentials as a cricketer. Except that he is employed by the Chennai Super Kings, the Indian Premier League franchise owned by the BCCI’s president, N Srinivasan.

The players of the world, judging by their votes, were unimpressed. When the confidential votes of the world’s 10 Test captains were voted, they numbered 9:1 in favour of retaining May. It was then that the BCCI started work.

Yea, in game of thrones speak, BCCI are Cercei rather than Tywin. They think they're smarter than they are, but really they think tactically (and badly at that) instead of strategically - seem bent on how they can come out ahead and show everyone off in one particular situation rather than thinking about long term consequences.

Originally Posted by KungFu_Kallis

Peter Siddle top scores in both innings....... Matthew Wade gets out twice in one ball

Also if this is true, I don't think this has anything to do with DRS - at least not centrally. It'd be a nice side effect but there is no chance of anyone forcing BCCI to use DRS unless they want to, so it doesn't matter who the representative is. I think they feel slighted and embarrassed that their candidate lost by a vote of 9:1, and they want to send a message.

Which is worse. I think people are naive if they think BCCI gives a **** about any one particular cricketing issue. They care about maintaining their financial and governing power. Getting their favorite pick voted down is a public embarrassment - and there's nothing BCCI punishes harder than people who 'go out of line'.

Well isn't there proof that the original count was 9-1 and the recount 5 all? I mean why a recount when the original vote was a landslide? Which country's board would push for their man and a recount? Why is Laxman standing at all: He's clearly conflicted. Which organisation is best placed to influence Laxman?

At the moment this is less a conspiracy and more a conflict of interest. There should not have been a recount. In fact Laxman should not have even been a candidate meaning the 2 should present holders should have been re elected unopposed.

I came here to kick ass and chew bubblegum... And I'm all out of bubblegum.

Posts

16,219

I think it's high time that someone remade the film Lagaan but featuring the BCCI as the equivalent of the massive ham-acting evil British colonial.

>>>>>>WHHOOOOOOOOOSHHHHHHH>>>>>>Fascist Dictator of the Heath Davis Appreciation SocietySupporting Petone's Finest since the very start - Iain O'Brien
Also Supporting the All Time #1 Batsman of All Time Ever - Jacques Kallis and the much maligned Peter Siddle.

Yea, in game of thrones speak, BCCI are Cercei rather than Tywin. They think they're smarter than they are, but really they think tactically (and badly at that) instead of strategically - seem bent on how they can come out ahead and show everyone off in one particular situation rather than thinking about long term consequences.